Certainly makes sense to me. My personal preference for VFXPlatform is to be somewhat conservative about how often you upgrade a heavyweight package, but when you finally do (or introduce a package for the first time, as with cmake), to be as aggressive as possible about getting to the most recent stable version.
How do you know all those versions off the top of your head? Is there a site that will tell you the version of a particular package on all the major distros? (That would sure be handy.) > On Jul 13, 2018, at 4:30 PM, Nick Porcino <mesh...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > To be honest, it's the Linux distros that also ship openexr that had me > cringing. > > Debian wheezy (2.8) > Debian stretch (3.7.2) * stable > Debian buster (3.11.2) > Ubuntu trusty (2.8) > Ubuntu xenial (3.5.1) * stable > Ubuntu cosmic (3.11.2) > Suse tumbleweed (3.11.2) * stable > > Any other distros to check? > > I can't see any reason not to leap ahead to 3.11, because (1) versions less > than 3.11 are very broken on Windows with regards to the combination of > recent visual studios and boost and (2) a new OpenEXR on a Linux will ship > with a distro containing at least 3.11. > > Make sense? > > > From: Larry Gritz <l...@larrygritz.com <mailto:l...@larrygritz.com>> > Sent: Friday, July 13, 2018 4:11 PM > To: Nick Porcino > Cc: openexr-devel@nongnu.org <mailto:openexr-devel@nongnu.org> > Subject: Re: [Openexr-devel] CMAKE_CXX_STANDARD > > I don't see why we would have to preserve 2.x compatibility. USD seems to > need CMake 3.1 on Windows. OpenVDB needs 3.1. OIIO and OSL both require 3.2. > Partio requires 3.8! So lack of support for 2.x would be in good company > with other widely used packages. > > A few people have commented on the VFX Platform forum that it should include > a minimum cmake release, so that package maintainers can count on some > reasonable minimum. > > > >> On Jul 13, 2018, at 3:50 PM, Nick Porcino <mesh...@hotmail.com >> <mailto:mesh...@hotmail.com>> wrote: >> >> The develop branch of OpenEXR uses CMake 3 features. So that line is an >> error. >> >> I hadn't thought about it, but it's troubling* to think that we might have >> to preserve compatibility with CMake 2.x >> >> * troubling == sobbing in terror in the corner as the shambling revenant >> shadow of CMake 2 groans and lurches forward belching broken features and ad >> hoc syntax >> >> >> >> From: Openexr-devel <openexr-devel-bounces+meshula=hotmail....@nongnu.org >> <mailto:openexr-devel-bounces+meshula=hotmail....@nongnu.org>> on behalf of >> Larry Gritz <l...@larrygritz.com <mailto:l...@larrygritz.com>> >> Sent: Friday, July 13, 2018 11:47 AM >> To: openexr-devel@nongnu.org <mailto:openexr-devel@nongnu.org> >> Subject: [Openexr-devel] CMAKE_CXX_STANDARD >> >> Is anybody troubled by the fact that the OpenEXR CMakeLists.txt starts with >> >> CMAKE_MINIMUM_REQUIRED(VERSION 2.8) >> >> but then makes use of CMAKE_CXX_STANDARD, which was only introduced with >> CMake 3.1? >> >> So I think that if anybody actually uses CMake < 3.1, it will just silently >> fail to provide the right -std=c++XX flags. >> >> >> -- >> Larry Gritz >> l...@larrygritz.com <mailto:l...@larrygritz.com> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Openexr-devel mailing list >> Openexr-devel@nongnu.org <mailto:Openexr-devel@nongnu.org> >> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/openexr-devel >> <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/openexr-devel> > -- > Larry Gritz > l...@larrygritz.com <mailto:l...@larrygritz.com> -- Larry Gritz l...@larrygritz.com
_______________________________________________ Openexr-devel mailing list Openexr-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/openexr-devel
